Time to move on to the second round, at least for some. Jersey and the Rangers both found out that late game 7 collapses can end your season. And we got a nice view of how to tell a contender from a pretender. Here's the scenario - on the same night, two teams go into the opposition's barn, and start off giving up three goals to the home team.
Here's the result for a playoff pretender, and a playoff contender
'Nuff said.
6 comments:
IMO the biggest issue for the Flames was the health of their top D-men. Phaneuf seemed to struggle all year long, and we find out now he has battled a rib/back injury for much of the year.
Losing Regher was the other massive traum, but the losses of Warrner and Giordano shouldn't be discounted either. Warrener is a Regher-lite defender and Giordano is arguably the best puck rusher on the blue-line and both their absences hurt.
How much? Consider that Gonchar scored the winner for Pittsburgh in their comeback against Philly and you can see the difference the presence of an elite defender makes - even to a team that already has Malkin and Crosby.
Injuries are a great place to hang your hat for any playoff disappointment, and no doubt the Flames had more than their share, but I'm going to question the character of the team.
This was a squad that found a way to blow a 14pt lead in the division. Instead of meeting St.Louis at home, they face Chicago on the road - Jonathan Toews instead of Keith Tkachuk.
This is a squad that could not hold a pair of leads in the first two games in Chicago. A team that blows a three-goal lead in game 4 at home but manages to get the win in the 3rd period. A team that apparently misses the flight to Chicago for game 5 as they could muster only 3 shots in the first period and only 20 in the game. A team whose "best game" of the series results in 44 shots - good - but only one goal.
I have a big man-crush on Jarome Iginla but where was he? I drafted Kipper and still think he is elite but did he steal a single game down the stretch or in this series? I'll let games 5 and 6 go for Phaneuf on account of the shoulder but where was the Dion of "Monster" fame this season? That is the big three that is supposed to make this team special enough to warrant Cup consideration and - sorry - they were not very good collectively or individually when it mattered most.
The slide for the Flames over the last 6 weeks of the season or so, and into the playoffs can be pinpointed to start at almost the exact moment that Robyn Regeher went down.
With Phaneuf at less than 65%, no Regeher, no Warrener, no Sarich, and no Giordano (4 of the top 6 out, and the #1 guy hurting), the Flames started lose games.
How good would Detroit have looked in the playoffs missing Kronwall, Rafalski, etc., etc., and Lidstrom under 65%? Would we be questioning their 'attitude'?
When the Pens were without Gonchar (and had a limping Whitney) they weren't even a playoff team.
The Flames outshot the Hawks 44-16 in the last game - read that again. 44-16. Which team would you say brought more effort to the table reading that shot total?
Lets recall as well that over the last quarter of the season the entire second line; Langkow, GlenX, and Bertuzzi were hurt, as well as one of the teams top checkers in Glen X. Over the last ten games of the season the Flames couldn't ice four forward lines and 7 defensemen.
Poo poo the injuries all you want, but no team takes those kinds of hits and makes a deep run.
If the Flames had been healthy, I submit things would have been different.
Of course, things could be worse, I'd rather have a dinged up Flames unit that can still make the playoffs than a healthy Oilers team that can't.
Oops GlenX got listed twice among the 2nd line injuries - should be Bourque.
Is Regher a core player on a par with Iggy, Kipper and Phaneuf? He may well be and instead of a core of 3 it is a core of 4.
So injuries to the Regher and Phaneuf explain the dismal performance in this year's playoffs and the lead up to it.
What happened in 2008? 2007? 2006? At what point does a team ask whether the core needs to be changed or do you risk an Ottawa (where I think part of the problem was mis-identifying the core, especially with respect to Chara)?
Doug asked: Is Regher a core player on a par with Iggy, Kipper and Phaneuf? He may well be and instead of a core of 3 it is a core of 4.
- I quit specifically suggested that the Flames had four pillars; Kipper, Iginla, Phaneuf and Regher. How important is Regeher? He's considered by most to be more likely to make the 2010 team than Phaneuf is. As a pure defensive defenseman with a mean streak and physical dimmension he's the prototype shutdown guy you play against the other teams top players to drive them crazy. Ask Hemsky.
Doug stated: So injuries to the Regher and Phaneuf explain the dismal performance in this year's playoffs and the lead up to it.
- I think they clearly do. It's difficult to overstate how trashed the Flames defense corps was. Phaneuf's injury limited his physical play and speed, making him average at best, and that left Aucoin and Leopold to pick up the load, with three rookies and an AHL guy in Ericksson logging serious minutes.
Doug ponders: What happened in 2008? 2007? 2006?
- Uh, we lost in the first round. But not always for the same reasons. I note that you don't go back to 2004 when the Flames went all the way to the Cup finals. So what we have is a team that five straight seasons has made the playoffs, generally shown improvement in the standings over those four years, and - oh yeah - made a serious run at the Cup.
How many of those seasons did we lose out to the eventual Western division champs? (i.e. Detroit, Anaheim, etc.?) What is clear to me is that the Flames have been evolving steadily towards an ever more dominant team, and in the case of this year we were undone by a spate of injuries across the lineup.
Doug questions: At what point does a team ask whether the core needs to be changed or do you risk an Ottawa (where I think part of the problem was mis-identifying the core, especially with respect to Chara)?
- With Phaneuf and Regeher still being quite young relatively speaking, they will be core players for a while. Kipper represents the biggest question mark as his stats have declined steadily since the dead-puck era came to an end, even if his wins have increased. Iginla was a late bloomer as an elite forward, so he should have 3 or 4 more highly productive years ahead of him.
The key will be developing a talent pipeline to keep the roster full of quality players around him (cheaply), and to correctly assess Kipper's worth as we move forward.
Post a Comment